Backward Castes in Post-Colonial Electoral Politics

History Optional Notes {PDF}

Complete Notes Package (Paper I & II) | 4500+ Pages | Instant Download

The caste system has traditionally exercised significant influence over access to power in India — privileged upper-caste groups have historically enjoyed disproportionately greater economic and political power, while lower-caste groups have faced far more limited access to the same. This article examines the distinct political trajectory of India’s Backward Classes (OBCs) — from their pre-independence organisation through the Justice Party and the Dravidian movement, to the decades-long struggle for reservation that culminated in the Mandal Commission, its implementation, and the ongoing debates over sub-categorisation. It is an important theme for UPSC History Optional and Post-Independence History aspirants studying the politics of social justice in India.

Understanding the Backward Classes

The issue of the Backward Classes or Castes, which came to a head with the Mandal Report and the anti-Mandal agitation of 1990, is quite distinct from the issue of the Scheduled Castes (SCs) — although efforts are often made at the political level to equate or collapse the two.

The so-called Backward Castes are, in reality, intermediate castes, whose position in the ritual hierarchy sat below that of the Brahmins and Kshatriyas, but above that of the Dalits. While they did suffer certain ritual disabilities relative to the upper castes, their position was in no way comparable to that of the SCs — they often retained access to land and other economic resources, and did not suffer from untouchability.
The category, moreover, contains great internal disparities: some castes, or sections of castes, are economically and socially powerful, while others remain quite disadvantaged, occupying a ritual position only just above that of the SCs.

Economic and Political Rise Through Land Reform

Sociologists have shown that Backward Castes such as the Ahirs, Yadavas, Kurmis, Vokkaligas, Lingayats, and Lodhas gained considerable economic advantage through post-independence land reforms, which granted land rights to ex-tenants of zamindars. This newfound economic strength translated directly into greater political clout and representation, which these groups have since sought to leverage for greater advantages in jobs, education, and beyond.

The Heterogeneity of the OBC Category

OBCs constitute a little less than half of India’s electorate, but form a vastly heterogeneous group.

One section of OBCs — including Yadavs and Kurmis in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, and Vokkaligas in Karnataka — hold a significant share of land ownership despite representing a relatively smaller proportion of the OBC population. Accounting for roughly one-third of the total OBC population nationally, this section is generally defined as the “upper OBCs.”
The other section — including groups such as Badhais, Lohars, and Kewats — has traditionally held a much smaller share of the rural economy, accounting for roughly two-thirds of the OBC population, and is generally defined as the “lower OBCs.”

OBC Voting Behaviour

According to the National Election Studies (NES) 2014, conducted by the Lokniti research programme, almost half of both lower and upper OBCs did not identify themselves as traditional supporters of any particular political party — a pattern broadly similar to that seen among other social groups in the country. There are, however, notable differences between the two groups:

Nearly one in four upper OBC voters identified themselves as traditional supporters of regional parties.
Among lower OBC voters, roughly one in five identified themselves as traditional supporters of the BJP.

Caste-Based Politics Under British Rule

Caste-based politics has a lineage stretching back to the colonial period, exemplified by figures and organisations such as B. R. Ambedkar, Jagjivan Ram, and the Justice Party.

The Justice Party

Originally known as the “South Indian Liberation Federation,” the Justice Party was founded in 1916–17 in Madras, as a political party of non-Brahmins.
The party was explicitly anti-Brahmin, and opposed the Indian National Congress, viewing it as a Brahmin-dominated organisation. It advocated separate representation for non-Brahmins — a demand the British consistently welcomed, granting the Party separate representation in the Madras Province under the Government of India Act, 1919. The Justice Party secured 28 reserved seats, and came to power in Madras Province in 1920.
The party was renamed Dravida Kazhagam (DK) in 1944, under the leadership of E. V. Ramaswamy Naicker, popularly known as “Periyar.” Periyar had been a member of Congress before leaving it in 1925.
A split within the DK in 1949 gave rise to a new party, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), under the leadership of C. N. Annadurai.

The Rise of the DMK

The DMK became a major political force in Tamil Nadu, positioning itself as anti-North, anti-Brahmin, and anti-Hindi, while glorifying Dravidian consciousness and culture. It played a highly active role in the anti-Hindi agitations of the 1960s.
The DMK worked extensively to mobilise non-Brahmins, and came to power in Tamil Nadu after Nehru, in 1967.
Following Annadurai’s death in 1969, a new leader, M. Karunanidhi, emerged, under whom the DMK continued pursuing a similar political line.
A further split within the DMK in 1972 gave rise to the AIADMK, under the leadership of M. G. Ramachandran — a party that shared some of the DMK’s older ideas, though without adhering rigidly to all of them.
After M. Karunanidhi’s death in 2018, his son, M. K. Stalin, became DMK president, contesting the 2019 general election as part of the Secular Progressive Alliance, under the broader United Progressive Alliance.

Contemporary Regional Parties Based on OBC Support

Numerous regional political parties today draw substantially on OBC support, including the Rashtriya Janata Dal in Bihar, the Samajwadi Party in Uttar Pradesh, and the Janata Dal (Secular) in Karnataka, among others.

The Politics of Affirmative Action for the Backward Classes: Phases and Demands

“The politics of affirmative action for the backward classes went through different phases during the post-independence period.” Discuss the phases of the movement, their demands, and the extent to which they were met by the Mandal Commission Report.

Early Demands and the AIBCF

The demand for reservation for the backward classes in government jobs was first raised in the Constituent Assembly by Punjabrao Deshmukh, much as Dr. B. R. Ambedkar had raised a similar demand for the Scheduled Castes.
To articulate this demand more systematically, Deshmukh founded the All India Backward Classes Federation (AIBCF) on 26 January 1950. Internal differences soon emerged within the AIBCF between those loyal to the Congress and those aligned with the Socialist Lohiaites, leading eventually to a split within the organisation — even as the underlying demand for backward class reservation persisted.

The Kaka Kalelkar Commission

The Kaka Kalelkar Commission was itself the outcome of demands made by backward class leadership around the time of independence. However, the Commission’s recommendation to use “class” as the criterion for identifying backward classes proved contentious, and Parliament’s rejection of its report led to renewed demand for a fresh commission — one that would instead adopt social and educational backwardness as its criteria.

The Mandal Commission

The appointment of the Mandal Commission, by the Janata Party government (1977–1979), was itself a result of sustained pressure from backward class leadership and their growing political clout. The Commission is popularly known by the name of its chairman, B. P. Mandal.
It submitted its report in December 1980, finding that OBCs — encompassing both Hindus and non-Hindus — constituted around 52% of the total population. This finding drew criticism for being based on what critics called “fictitious data.”
Constrained by the legal requirement that total reservation should not exceed 50%, the Commission recommended 27% reservation for OBCs in government jobs. Its other key recommendations included:
- OBC candidates selected on merit in open competition should not be adjusted against their 27% reservation quota.
- The same reservation should apply to promotion quotas at all levels.
- Unfilled reserved vacancies should be carried forward for three years, and de-reserved thereafter.
- Relaxation in the upper age limit for direct recruitment should be extended to OBC candidates, in the same manner already applied to SC and ST candidates.
- A roster system for each category of posts should be adopted for OBCs, mirroring existing practice for SC and ST candidates.

Implementation and Its Aftermath

The Mandal Commission’s recommendations were finally implemented by V. P. Singh’s government in 1990, which announced 27% reservation for OBCs in central government jobs — instantly making reservation a major national political issue. Even so, this implementation did not fully settle the reservation debate: newer groups have continued to demand recognition as OBCs in the years since.
The V. P. Singh government’s action triggered a widespread and often violently characterised movement of protest, and the issue quickly became legally complex, drawing extensive judicial interpretation.
In the landmark Indira Sawhney case (1992), the Supreme Court settled key aspects of the issue by introducing the concept of the “creamy layer,” excluding the more socio-economically advanced sections of OBCs from reservation benefits.
Parliament subsequently enacted the National Commission for Backward Classes Act, 1993, constituting a National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC).
- In the Indira Sawhney judgment, the Supreme Court had directed the Government of India, State Governments, and Union Territory Administrations to constitute a permanent body — in the nature of a Commission or Tribunal — to entertain, examine, and recommend upon requests for inclusion, and complaints of over-inclusion or under-inclusion, in the OBC list.
Later, the 123rd Constitutional Amendment Bill (2018), enacted as the 102nd Constitutional Amendment, elevated the National Commission for Backward Classes to a constitutional body, functioning under India’s Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment. The amendment also inserted Article 338B into the Constitution.
The NCBC has further recommended sub-dividing OBCs into “backward,” “more backward,” and “extremely backward” blocs, distributing the 27% quota among them in proportion to their respective population shares — a step intended to prevent stronger OBC groups from disproportionately cornering the benefits of reservation.

The Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment and Sub-Categorisation

The Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, a Government of India ministry, is responsible for the welfare, social justice, and empowerment of disadvantaged and marginalised sections of society — including Scheduled Castes (SC), Other Backward Classes (OBC), persons with disabilities, the elderly, and victims of drug abuse.
On 2 October 2017, the Government constituted a Commission under Justice (Retd.) G. Rohini, under Article 340 of the Constitution, to examine the sub-categorisation of Other Backward Classes, with the following terms of reference:
- To examine the extent of inequitable distribution of reservation benefits among the various castes or communities included within the broad category of Other Backward Classes, with reference to those included in the Central List.
- To work out a scientific mechanism, criteria, norms, and parameters for such sub-categorisation.
- To identify the respective castes, communities, sub-castes, or synonyms in the Central List of OBCs and classify them into their respective sub-categories.
The Commission expressed the need for detailed caste-wise data, requiring additional time to compile — as a result, its tenure has been extended by the Government on multiple occasions.

Note: Aspirants should continue following current affairs for further developments in backward caste electoral politics, particularly regarding OBC sub-categorisation and the Rohini Commission’s findings.

Conclusion

The political trajectory of India’s Backward Classes reveals a distinctive arc — from intermediate ritual status under the traditional caste hierarchy, through early twentieth-century organisation via the Justice Party and its Dravidian successors, to a sustained, decades-long constitutional and legislative struggle for reservation that reached its decisive turning point with the Mandal Commission’s implementation in 1990. Unlike the struggle of the Scheduled Castes, the OBC movement has always had to contend with the sheer internal heterogeneity of its own constituency — a divide between upper and lower OBCs that continues to shape both electoral behaviour and the unfinished project of sub-categorisation today. For UPSC aspirants, this history is essential to understanding both the constitutional architecture of India’s reservation policy and its continuing evolution through bodies like the NCBC and the Rohini Commission.